term limits, age limits

governor’s term limits

It’s never too early to start thinking elections, especially in New Hampshire, where state representatives, executive councilors and the governor are elected every two years.

New Hampshire and neighboring Vermont are actually the only two states whose governors serve two-year terms, and the suggestion has come up again this year to double that length. If CACR 9 passes, it will be up to voters to decide.

“Similar constitutional amendments calling for a four-year term for governor have gone to the voters in past years,” writes Rep. Jim Splaine (D-Portsmouth) in his minority report supporting CACR 9, “and votes have been close to obtaining the 2/3rds necessary, but have come up short.

This question has not been put to the voters for some time, so putting this on the 2010 ballot for consideration was the proper thing to do.”
The bill, sponsored by Sen. Martha Fuller Clark (D-Portsmouth), passed handily in the Senate. It goes to the floor of the House for a full vote on Wednesday, April 29, and if the House Election Law Committee is any indicator, it will be close.

“The two-year term for governor has served us well since 1877 when it was changed from a one-year term,” writes Rep. Shawn Jasper (R-Hudson) in his report for the committee’s majority, which opposes the constitutional amendment. The governor should stand for re-election on the same schedule as the Legislature, he argues, “and be judged by the voters for the job that we have all done.”

But a fair portion of the governor’s job consists of campaigning, according to Splaine. With governors being elected in November and inaugurated in January, they have six solid months to work with the Legislature to set the biennial budget. But if they face re-election, campaigning starts almost as soon as the budget is signed.

“That translates to about 62 weeks,” he figures. “The people of New Hampshire deserve a governor who will be able to focus more time on governing, rather than raising money and campaigning for office.”

This is a reasonable argument, according to Jasper, but would be more convincing if it came from governors. “We believe that being responsible to the voters on a frequent basis is worth the time and effort that it takes to campaign,” he writes.

If it passes, the question would appear on the 2010 ballot and would not take effect until 2012, so as to stagger the state’s gubernatorial and presidential election activities.

the 17-year-old vote

A different election-related constitutional amendment stalled in the House earlier this session. Sponsored by Rep. Brendon Browne (D-Dover), CACR 4 would have allowed people under 18 to vote in presidential primaries, as long as they would turn 18 by the time the general election came around. A similar bill passed in 2008, but the Supreme Court advised that it was unconstitutional without voter approval.

“While 17-year-olds can be tried as adults for crimes committed as a minor, they are not allowed to participate in the civic system that would set the laws that govern their behavior. We find this to be unjust,” reasons Rep. Kevin Hodges (D-Manchester) for the majority of the House Election Law Committee in favor of the amendment. He also cites studies indicating that the younger a person starts to vote, the more likely they are to become habitual voters. Since the primaries do not actually elect people to office, he argues, there seems to be no harm done.

But it would be too confusing and present too much of a discrepancy with age limits for municipal eletions, according to Rep. Dino Scala (R-Wakefield), writing for the minority. And, simply put, “17 years old is too young to vote.”

CACR 4 failed to win the necessary three-fifths majority to make it off the House floor, so it died.

automatic SSS registration

Another bill affecting young people—well, half of them—relates to Selective Service registration. Even without a national draft for military service, federal law requires all men between the ages of 18 and 26 to register with the Selective Service System, which keeps track of eligible soldiers.
It could be patriotism, the hefty punishment for failure to register, or a combination of both that produces such a high success rate: New Hampshire boasts 95 percent compliance. The few who don’t meet it face a $250,000 fine and/or five years imprisonment if caught. Signing up is as simple as checking a box on driver’s license paperwork.

Senate Bill 17, sponsored by Sen. John Barnes (R-Raymond), would change the meaning of that checkbox from signing up to opting out. If it passes, eligible men would automatically be registered with SSS when they go through the DMV. “This bill does not affect anyone who wants to claim to be a conscientious objector,” writes Rep. Michael O’Brien (D-Nashua), “as that would be declared and vetted when the person is called in a draft, and conscientious objectors are not pre-registered.”

Rep. Jennifer Coffey (R-Andover) just doesn’t see the need—or the fiscal statement indicating what it would cost. “Our current system is not broken and does not need additional tax dollars spent,” she writes. “What is needed is education for new American citizens when they immigrate to our country as it is believed that up to 4 percent of those not registered are new citizens.”

With the House Transportation Committee split, there is no recommendation on the bill. It will go to a full House vote on Wednesday, April 29.

Front Door Politics is a weekly legislative update for everyone affected by New Hampshire laws. An online learning center, additional reporting and a blog subscription are available at www.frontdoorpolitics.com .